Compare

How mooter compares

We're not the only LLM router. We are the one built for Claude Code.

Eleven capabilities. Mooter is the only 11/11.

The capabilities below are derived from the real pain points of running many Claude Code sessions at once. Each tool does something well — none of the others does all eleven.

Capability
mooter
v1.21.5
Composio AO
agent os
Conductor
orchestr.
Cursor Bg
bg agents
Agent Teams
anthropic
Codex
openai
Antigravity
google
Termdock
multiplexer
Spawn agents
mooter local by default · others cloud-only
Local-first
runs without the cloud
Cross-session $ savings
tracks spend across every terminal
5-hour quota forecast
predicts when you hit the wall
Cross-session routing learning
gets cheaper the more you use it
4-layer sandbox
network · fs · secrets · config
Intent-based UX
say the goal, not the model
State-of-art install wizard
one path, no foot-guns
Multiplexer plugins
Zellij · tmux · WezTerm · Warp
Orchestration locks across terminals
Worktree Conductor — no two agents on one file
Workflow visibility statusline chip
always-on HUD of what is running
Score
11
/ 11
1
/ 11
1
/ 11
4
/ 11
3
/ 11
4
/ 11
1
/ 11
2
/ 11
full partial / unclear shipped but with a disclosed flaw not available
Antigravity's sandbox shipped with CVE-2025-59528 (prompt-injection escape, disclosed). Marked shipped-but-flawed rather than passing.
Comparison based on public documentation as of June 2026. Methodology: 11 capabilities derived from observed pain points of multi-session Claude Code workflows. Scores are counted from the cells above — got a cell wrong? open an issue →
honest > inflated

Scores are derived honestly from the per-row cells, not curated to make Mooter look better. Mooter wins 5 capabilities no other tool has — cross-session $ savings, 5h quota forecast, cross-session routing learning, orchestration locks across terminals, and the workflow-visibility statusline chip — and it is the only stack that ships all 11 in one tool.

vs other routers

And against the routers and proxies

mooterClaude Code defaultLiteLLM proxyContinue.devOpenRouter
ArchitectureHook (local)Direct API callHTTP proxyIDE pluginAPI gateway
Local models (Ollama)✓ T0 native✓ (configurable)
Auto-routing by complexity✓ T0–T3 axis✗ Opus on all⚠️ rule-based⚠️ manual⚠️ tags
Domain routing (packs)✓ 7+ Moo Packs
Pre-prompt < 50ms overhead✓ 14ms p50n/a~80–200ms~120ms~200ms cloud
Code/prompts leave machine⚠️ T0 routes local; cloud Haiku if key set✓ all to Anthropic✓ through proxy✓ to cloud✓ via gateway
Pack-based specialization✓ Moo Packs⚠️ commands
Adapter Forge (local LoRA)⚠️ Wave 26 (training)
Subscription-aware✓ tier-detect⚠️ via envn/a
Live statusline HUD✓ 3-line⚠️ side panel
Per-bash tool badge✓ per-call tier
Sparkline (last-10 tier mix)✓ inline
End-of-session digest✓ mooter digest
Live local subagent visibility✓ 🐄×N live
Cost tracking per-prompt✓ real-time✓ in logs⚠️ session✓ dashboard
Open source✓ MITn/a (closed)✓ Apache 2✓ Apache 2✗ (gateway hosted)
Free✓ foreverdepends on subself-host or paid⚠️ markup on API
Setup time1 commandn/a30+ min (config)install pluginsign up + key
Works without internet✓ T0 local

Last updated unknown. Snapshot of public functionality at the time. We checked the docs. If we got something wrong, open an issue and we'll fix it.

Cursor / Copilot / Cody — and the open-source agents Cline, Aider and Roo Code — are AI coding assistants/agents, not LLM routers. They decide what to do; mooter decides which model runs each step. It complements them (run mooter under Claude Code while you use any of them elsewhere) rather than replacing them — so this table compares routers, not agents.